Educational technology facilitators will contribute to the shared vision for campus integration of technology and foster an environment and culture conducive to the realization of the vision.
Performance Indicators:
Identify and apply educational and technology related research, the psychology of learning, and instructional design principles in guiding the use of computers and technology in education.
Apply strategies for and knowledge of issues related to managing the change process in schools
Apply effective group process skills
Lead in the development and evaluation of district technology planning and implementation.
Engage in supervised field-based experiences with accomplished technology facilitators and/or directors
This technology standard of campus technology integration vision fueled my teaching and interraction with colleagues last school year, 2009-2010. During the summer, which was the start of my M.Ed in Educational Technology work, I rewrote my curriculum based on principles I learned through readings. The readings enlightened my understanding of 21C learning, such as project-based collaborative work, using Web 2.0 tools, digital learning, such as gaming and virtual worlds (Prensky, 2008). The reading also presented how our classrooms often don't relect how the students now learn. I rewrote my curriculum and planned a meeting with my principal regarding the use of the mobile computer lab cart for more project-based learning. In the previous year, I was one of two teachers on campus to request the use of the mobile computer cart and the only one to actually use it. I signed it out for a few weeks at a time at least every grading period. I planned to ask my principal if I could reserve the cart for longer and more frequent periods of time. At the start of the conversation, I noted that I was one of two teachers to reserve the cart. My principal then asked if I wanted to house the cart in my room. I couldn't believe it; even more than I wanted! For that entire year the mobile computer cart stayed with me and I had a 1:1 ratio of student to laptop with wireless internet access.
"In the absence of a strong vision for effective use, technologies will be underutilzed. Technology, like all tools, can be adapted for many purposes" (Williamson and Redish, 2009, p. 178). The district and campus vision were clear, integrate technology. The school year began with a technology staff development that left some teachers frustrated and confused. Some teachers were not ready for the technology applications used within the workshop, even though all of the group had completed minimum technology requirements as outlined by the district. At the end of the session, it was more clear to me that the campus had many small steps to take in our tech-savvy journey. I followed up with a few teachers in hopes that they would feel more comfortable with technology.
I started making changes in my own classroom. The changes I implemented in my classroom sparked change in other classrooms. I assisted colleagues in some technology tools and eventually presented helpful classroom technology tools during a staff development session. By the end of the year, the campus was more abuzz with improved technology skills, even though the improvements varied; one teacher learned how to email an attachment while another teacher's improvement involved use of student response systems.
This year technology learning was squelched by 'too much too soon.' Teachers were finally becoming familiar at a successful pace with technology integration, when another expectation was forced upon them. Teachers felt a screeching stop in progress and they were forced to deal with a new curriculum which was not even complete at the start of the school year. Teachers are not allowed much flexibility within the new curriculum and feel stifled by it. Because of this inundation, technology growth slowed. It is no longer clear what our technology vision is because everyone is simply trying to make it through the curriculum. My own teaching position changed rather unexpectedly and I felt stripped of my ability to prepare students with technology skills they needed (Solomon and Schrum, 2007). For me, January will be the rebirth of technology in my classroom. For others, I don't know when the skies will clear and we start making progress again, but in the meantime, the teachers know that I am willing and capable of assisting them.
References
Prensky, M. (2008). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership. March 2008. 40-45.
Solomon, G. & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0; new tools, new schools. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology Education. 9.
Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). ISTE's Technology facilitation and leadership standards; what every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene, OR:
International Society for Technology Education. 178.
Technology Facilitation Standard VIII
Educational technology facilitators will contribute to the shared vision for campus integration of technology and foster an environment and culture conducive to the realization of the vision.
Performance Indicators:
Identify and apply educational and technology related research, the psychology of learning, and instructional design principles in guiding the use of computers and technology in education.
Apply strategies for and knowledge of issues related to managing the change process in schools
Apply effective group process skills
Lead in the development and evaluation of district technology planning and implementation.
Engage in supervised field-based experiences with accomplished technology facilitators and/or directors
This technology standard of campus technology integration vision fueled my teaching and interraction with colleagues last school year, 2009-2010. During the summer, which was the start of my M.Ed in Educational Technology work, I rewrote my curriculum based on principles I learned through readings. The readings enlightened my understanding of 21C learning, such as project-based collaborative work, using Web 2.0 tools, digital learning, such as gaming and virtual worlds (Prensky, 2008). The reading also presented how our classrooms often don't relect how the students now learn. I rewrote my curriculum and planned a meeting with my principal regarding the use of the mobile computer lab cart for more project-based learning. In the previous year, I was one of two teachers on campus to request the use of the mobile computer cart and the only one to actually use it. I signed it out for a few weeks at a time at least every grading period. I planned to ask my principal if I could reserve the cart for longer and more frequent periods of time. At the start of the conversation, I noted that I was one of two teachers to reserve the cart. My principal then asked if I wanted to house the cart in my room. I couldn't believe it; even more than I wanted! For that entire year the mobile computer cart stayed with me and I had a 1:1 ratio of student to laptop with wireless internet access.
"In the absence of a strong vision for effective use, technologies will be underutilzed. Technology, like all tools, can be adapted for many purposes" (Williamson and Redish, 2009, p. 178). The district and campus vision were clear, integrate technology. The school year began with a technology staff development that left some teachers frustrated and confused. Some teachers were not ready for the technology applications used within the workshop, even though all of the group had completed minimum technology requirements as outlined by the district. At the end of the session, it was more clear to me that the campus had many small steps to take in our tech-savvy journey. I followed up with a few teachers in hopes that they would feel more comfortable with technology.
I started making changes in my own classroom. The changes I implemented in my classroom sparked change in other classrooms. I assisted colleagues in some technology tools and eventually presented helpful classroom technology tools during a staff development session. By the end of the year, the campus was more abuzz with improved technology skills, even though the improvements varied; one teacher learned how to email an attachment while another teacher's improvement involved use of student response systems.
This year technology learning was squelched by 'too much too soon.' Teachers were finally becoming familiar at a successful pace with technology integration, when another expectation was forced upon them. Teachers felt a screeching stop in progress and they were forced to deal with a new curriculum which was not even complete at the start of the school year. Teachers are not allowed much flexibility within the new curriculum and feel stifled by it. Because of this inundation, technology growth slowed. It is no longer clear what our technology vision is because everyone is simply trying to make it through the curriculum. My own teaching position changed rather unexpectedly and I felt stripped of my ability to prepare students with technology skills they needed (Solomon and Schrum, 2007). For me, January will be the rebirth of technology in my classroom. For others, I don't know when the skies will clear and we start making progress again, but in the meantime, the teachers know that I am willing and capable of assisting them.
References
Prensky, M. (2008). Turning on the lights. Educational Leadership. March 2008. 40-45.
Solomon, G. & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0; new tools, new schools. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology Education. 9.
Williamson, J. & Redish, T. (2009). ISTE's Technology facilitation and leadership standards; what every K-12 leader should know and be able to do. Eugene, OR:
International Society for Technology Education. 178.